Bolivarian Revolution Struggles On In Venezuela
By Edward Dvorak

Just days before he was scheduled to give a speech at the UN in New York, the President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez Frias, abruptly canceled his trip. Intelligence sources in Venezuela announced that they had “overwhelming  evidence” of a CIA-backed plot to bring down his plane en route to New York. 

Chavez has also raised concerns about  Venezuelan anti-government forces training on U.S. soil. These training camps were reported in an  editorial in the Wall Street Journal  on Jan. 29, 2003. Chavez spoke forcefully about the allegations:

There in the US, they are conspiring against Venezuela. Terrorists are training against Venezuela and it is a demand that must be made of the US because they are obligated under International Law to act. If what they say is true, that they are fighting against Terrorism, they should act against the terrorists on their own territory that are threatening Venezuela.

The U.S. government quickly announced that they would open up an investigation into the allegations made by President Chavez. The US Ambassador to Venezuela, Charles S. Shapiro responded: “[I]t is not necessarily a crime, but we are in the full process of collecting information. If there is anyone to blame, our government knows what to do.”

White House Special envoy Otto Reich said that the charges were “absolutely ridiculous. Such a plan does not exist. The Venezuelan government is accusing the CIA in an attempt to create an impasse and deviate attention from the recall vote.”

This latest reported attempt on the life of Chavez is only one of a series of plots to remove him from office. On April 11-13, 2002, Chavez was removed from office in a 48-hour coup d’etat that was lead by businessman Pedro Carmona and officers in the military. The U.S. was the only Western Hemisphere nation to recognize the dictatorial government which overthrew the democratically-elected leader. Only the enormous public outcry of millions foiled the coup attempt and Chavez was re-instated.

Washington has also tried to impose new Presidential elections through the Organization of American States (OAS). However, in December of 2002, this plan backfired when the proposal became the first major U.S. initiative to be unanimously rejected by the OAS in a vote of 32-0.

On September 26th in New York, Foreign Minister Roy Chaterton Matos told the UN General Assembly that the opposition parties will go to any length to promote violence in their attempts to overthrow Chavez. He also defended the government’s policies saying that they were a necessary antidote to the effects of  “savage neo-liberalism. After many years of malfeasance and endemic corruption, Venezuela is now beginning a profound process of peaceful democratic change. The developing world is suffering hunger, misery, and exclusion caused by unjust economic policies.”

However, instead of investigating the charges made by the Venezuelan government, the US media responded with charges of their own. On October 6, 2003, US News & World Report published an article by Linda Robinson entitled, “Terror Close To Home.”  Among other allegations, this report, which cited only un-named US military and intelligence officials, accused the Venezuelan government of supporting the Colombian guerrillas and other Arab Terrorist groups. The article concludes ominously: “Given all that is happening in Chavez’ Venezuela, some American officials regret that terrorism is seen chiefly as a Middle East problem and that the U.S. is not looking to protect its Southern Flank.”

Chavez has said that the obvious aim of the article was to create a pretext for continuing subversion to overthrow the Venezuelan government. He described the article as “sewage. It’s disgusting,it comes from the extreme right-wing sectors in the United States. I can only hope that the circles of power in the U.S. don’t keep on repeating such rubbish and lies. The suggestion is that I am a terrorist and should be aggressively pursued. The CIA used similar arguments in their 1973 coup d’etat against Chile’s President Salvador Allende.”

The Venezuelan Ambassador to the US, Bernardo Alvarez Herrera, also responded by sending a letter to U.S. News & World Report commenting that Ms. Robinson did not offer any concrete proof of her allegations. Ambassador Herrera concludes his letter: “By reporting unproven allegations as facts and ignoring contrary evidence, Linda Robinson’s October 6 article portrayed Venezuela in a manner so misleading that it undermined the credibility of U.S. News & World Report.”

Venezuelanalysis has recently reported that US General James T. Hill of the Southern Command spoke with reporters after a seminar at the Center for Strategic International Studies in Washington, DC. He was asked about the claims that the Venezuelan government was collaborating with radical Islamic groups and Colombian guerrillas. Hill said: “We don’t have any proof to validate that article.” Earlier in October, U.S. Southern Command Director of Operations, Brigadier General Benjamin R. Mixon also dismissed the allegations in an interview with the Miami Herald.

Linda Robinson, who continues to defend her article, is a member of the US Council on Foreign Relations, an influential group that has dominated foreign policy since World War 2. Venezuelan billionaire Gustavo Cisneros, who, according to several sources, including Newsweek,  was a financial supporter of the April 2002 coup. He is also a member of the Council. 

The Venezuela  government is still waiting for the U.S. government to respond to the reports of anti-Chavez terrorist groups training on US soil.

Opposing The Neoliberal Agenda

Many have noted that the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela is the strongest democratically-based opposition to the neoliberal agenda happening in the world today. In the words of Chavez: “In Venezuela, we are developing a model of struggle against neo-liberalism and imperialism. For this reason, we find that we have friends in the world, although we also have many enemies.”

Ever since Chavez was elected in a landslide victory in 1998, the powerful business interests, the rich landowners, and the opposition-controlled media have continually promoted efforts to force him from power. After the failed coup, oil executives, along with oil workers led a 61-day General Strike in Dec.- Jan. 2003, which caused massive social and economic destruction throughout the country. Chavez responded by firing 15,000 employees of the company Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA). The workers were fired for abandoning their jobs and for acts of sabotage against the oil-dependent economy. Commenting on the crisis at PDVSA, newly-appointed Director, Ivan Hernandez states: “The company had grown outrageously in the last ten years, especially at the management levels in the cities. There were 600-700 oil executives in Caracas alone; that was not justified.”  When asked if the fired workers would be able to return, he responded: “I think that the oil workers were very confused and manipulated. They lost their sense of loyalty and a sense of belonging to work and family. They cannot come back, because the damage is too big; the social damage to the country is terrible.” In an article about participatory democracy in Venezuela, Charles Hardy writes: “ The saddest part about all of this is the time, energy and income the country has lost because of the attempt of the elite to sabotage the efforts of the government in the last four years.”

Henk Ruyssenaars, an Amsterdam-based member of the Foreign Press Foundation and veteran journalist who covered the US-Chile intervention 30 years ago comments:

“It is strange that in every country, there is this group of greedy people who will sacrifice even their own family if need be to get richer at the expense of everyone and everything. Like Allende said: ‘We better do something about, and react to those traitors before they put another Pinochet in Venezuela.”

Opposition To Stage Recall Vote of Chavez

The Opposition is currently trying to gather the necessary signatures required to call for a Revocatory Referendum, whereby Chavez can be removed from office by a recall vote. The original Feb. 2003 campaign was recently dismissed by the national Election Institute (CNE), on account of discovering many fraudulent signatures. In October, the Opposition began claiming that Chavez is attempting to intimidate those who may sign against him in the present  campaign. Chavez responds: “All that I am going to say on the matter is that I am threatening no one. I only ask that the people should simply reflect on what they are doing. I am confident that they do not want to return to the policies of the Punto Fijo  corruption that was before.”

By referring to Punto Fijo, Chavez was describing the power-sharing arrangement of the Accion Democratica (AD) and the Christian Socialist parties (COPEI) that was fraught with corruption and led Venezuela to the verge of political and social bankruptcy.
Former President Carlos Andres Perez, who was convicted of corruption in 1993, is currently in exile in the Dominican Republic. Noting that the Dominican government refuses to extradite Perez on an international corruption warrant, Vice-President Jose Vincente Rangel says: “We are frankly surprised that the Dominican government can protect a criminal like the ex-President.”

During October, another controversy erupted when the telecommunication regulatory agency CONATEL confiscated transmitting equipment from the TV giant, Globovision. The international media was quick to condemn this action by the Chavez government. However, it was quickly established that Globovision had been using the equipment to broadcast on illegal, unregistered frequencies. Chavez has repeatedly charged the 24-hour news channel with providing backing for the short-lived coup in April 2002. He has also complained about “Media Terrorism” and accuses the privately-controlled media of promoting efforts to force him from power. Recently, Chavez told a group of businessmen in Caracas: “If the private TV channels go back to promoting destabilization and violence in the country they won’t be able to broadcast any more. It is as though they light a match and then throw gasoline on it, we can’t permit that.”

Historic Land Reform Process Continues

It is well known that the current Land Reform in Venezuela is bitterly opposed the large landowners and the business interests  that were profiting from the mass importation of food. Before the enactment of the Ley Tierra (Land Law) in 2001, Venezuela imported approximately 70% of their food. President Chavez asks rhetorically, “We have excellent conditions to supply ourselves with a great deal of what we consume, so why is it that we are importing black beans?” According to the National Land Institute (INTI), 60% of the arable land is owned by less than 2% of the population, with vast tracts of land that remain uncultivated. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of farmers remain landless.

At a historic gathering on August 30, 2003 in Caracas, the INTI distributed over one million hectares of state-owned land to peasant and indigenous farmers throughout Venezuela. The transfer of land was witnessed by peasant and indigenous leaders from throughout the hemisphere. Blanca Chancoso, spokeswoman of the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities in Ecuador (CONAIE) said: “Continental Unity will be necessary to defend the Land reform process. In this hemisphere, land is not a gift, but it is simply being returned to its rightful owners after five centuries of usurpation.” The second stage of the plan is to deliver another million hectares by the end of the year.

However, the land reform process has been met with stiff resistance by the large landowners throughout the country. In recent months, peasant leaders claim that dozens of campesinos have been murdered by sicaros,  assassins hired by the landowners, in an effort to throw the land reform process into chaos. In the State of Zulia, on August 27, Indigenous Rights Attorney  Joe Castillo was murdered, while his wife and one-year old son were wounded in the attack. Many have said that the assassination is part of a concerted policy to eliminate leaders who defend the rights of the indigenous and the campesinos.

“Venezuela right now has the only government-administered land reform in Latin America,” said Peter Rosset, co-Director of the Institute for Food and Development Policy. “In the US, Chavez is often painted as a villain or crazy but the land reform shows he is much more on the side of the poor than any other president in the region.”

Those who have benefited from this process, like Amable Soto, currently working on a cooperative farm with 32 other campesinos and their families, openly praise the developments: “I had always aspired to have a piece of land to work, to live on, but that was never possible before. Chavez has given us what no government has.”

In many of the States in Venezuela, local ranchers accuse the government officials of encouraging farmers to occupy private ranches. INTI officials say that they have openly condemned the illegal occupations, pointing out that the campesinos were acting independently. According to Marino Alvarado, a researcher for Provea,  a Caracas-based human rights group, “The illegal invasions are the exception, not the rule.”

Under the Ley Tierra,  the distributed land remains in the hands of the State, while the government encourages cooperatives and collective farms, while providing housing, health care and education. Critics say that the law violates the right to private property; the opposition claims that Chavez is practicing “Castro-Communism.” The Chavez government responds that they are protecting the small landowners who were often forced to sell their property to the large landowners because of debts and lack of credits. They argue that forming peasant cooperatives is the only way to compete with large scale agribusiness.

Violence remains a constant threat during the land reform process. Richard Vicas, a INTI coordinator in Portuguesa State remarks: “I’ve received a lot of death threats. I take them quite seriously. This opposition kills.” In this conflict, largely ignored by the opposition-controlled media, over 75 campesinos have been killed in only two years. Most of those killed were supporters of Chavez. Despite these crimes, the unwavering support  among the poor for “Our Commandante” Chavez is overwhelming. Everywhere, people are talking about maize, vegetables, fruits, cattle, fish-farming, land cultivation, schools and housing. No one forgets that the first thing done during the coup of April 2002 was to annul the Ley Tierra. If they take all this away from us, there will be civil war,” warn the peasants who have struggled so persistently to see the victory of the Bolivarian Revolution.

Improving the Lives of the Urban Poor.

To address the need of the urban poor, the Chavez government has created a network of “Bolivarian Circles” to begin the extensive social and political activism necessary to aid the disenfranchised population. These Circles have brought basic literacy training to over half a million in recent months; hundreds of thousands of children have started school for the first time; many work to secure credits for small businesses; and recently, doctors  imported from Cuba as part of a petroleum deal are paying house calls to poor neighborhoods. Most importantly, tens of thousands have received title to the land that they have been squatting on for generations. Many of the urban poor speak of hope for the future that they never had before.

“The people have awakened. We will never go back to the past.” Said Josephina Corranil who works as a maid by day and a community organizer by night. Maria Lopez echoes those views: For many years I had lived here. Yet, I never worked for the community. Now, I feel important.”  The Bolivarian Circles also encourage the members to  learn and teach each other their constitutional rights and responsibilities. In the barrios around Caracas, many are taking those responsibilities to heart. In these neighborhoods, there are many who are willing to defend Chavez to the death, and it is not an uncommon sight to find the portrait of Chavez on the altar next to Jesus Christ.

Opposition leaders accuse the Bolivarian Circles of being armed practitioners of terrorism. Both the Venezuelan and international media have been disseminating this message in their newspapers , radio and TV broadcasts. Unfortunately, with very limited resources and inefficient public relations, it has been very difficult to compete with the lies and distortions presented by  the major media corporations. (For more on their work, see bolivariancircles.net)

Chavez’ sympathies with Cuban leader Fidel Castro and his continuing support for peasant and indigenous rights have made him an easy target for those that accuse his supporters of being promoters of terrorism. Yet, opposition leaders have been unable to produce any credible evidence linking the Bolivarian Circles to terror activities. It remains just another tactic to create chaos in a country that is courageously trying to address the need of the poor.
We ask that you join us, insuring that the Revolutions of the 21st century can be decided by voters, rather than being fought by death squads and guerrillas.- Bolivarian Circles.

The events of the attempted April 2002 coup were captured in the excellent documentary: The Revolution Will Not Be Televised. Co-Directors: Kim Bartley & Donnacha O’Briain. Available at Alternatives Library, Anabel Taylor Hall @ Cornell University. For an in-depth introduction to the Chavez phenomenon, see: Steve Ellner, David Hillinger (eds.) Venezuelan Politics in the Chavez Era: Class Polarization and Conflict, [Boulder, CO; Lynne Rienner, 2003]